Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Using Voice to Code Faster than Keyboard

ergoemacs.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 137 posts

Re: Using Voice to Code Faster than Keyboard

#61

Post by ohwp »

What I think is interesting is that a lot can be done to make typing easier and more human when you can type like you speak (and think).

For example: we say/think

  for each item in list
but in a lot of languages you need to type something like

  foreach(item in list) {
A step further: we say/think

  let a be the substring of b from 1 to the end
we need to type

  a = b.substring(1)
Ofcourse the last example is much shorter and even more readable (to the machine for sure) but maybe code could be a little more human.

Re: Using Voice to Code Faster than Keyboard

#62

Post by mkl »

ics wrote: post #16

I was trying to work something like this out to try about a month ago but had to put it aside for later. Running my speech recognition inside a virtual machine was a dealbreaker, but not all that uncommon for people doing this sort of thing. I really, really wanted to get Julius[1] running in OS X but after a couple tries I couldn't get it to build (problem on my end– this is a good reminder to get it sorted out). If…

If you're looking for an alternative to CMU Sphinx that's still FOSS, you really should check Julius out. There are plenty of docs on getting it running with languages other than Japanese. If you're curious about how well it can work, check out this[2] demo (requires Chrome).

[2] http://www.workinprogress.ca/KIKU/dictation.php

It seems like this demo is not using Julius, but it's mixing messages a bit. The bottom of the page says "Service provided by Google Inc.", but the link right next to it (for downloadable software, also apparently called "kiku"?) says Julius etc.

Re: Using Voice to Code Faster than Keyboard

#64

Post by gd1 »

ohwp wrote: post #61

What I think is interesting is that a lot can be done to make typing easier and more human when you can type like you speak (and think). For example: we say/think for each item in list but in a lot of languages you need to type something like foreach(item in list) { A step further: we say/think let a be the substring of b from 1 to the end we need to type a = b.substring(1) Ofcourse the last example is much shorter a…

I disagree. You could argue that a musician probably thinks "I have to play a D# for one and a half beats" as well. Or they can draw a dotted quarter on the sheet. We have symbolic languages for a reason - they are, once learnt, superior. If anything code needs to move further away from spoken language, more in the direction of APL and its descendants.

A skilled musician likely doesn't engage the speech centres of their brain, they see a note on the sheet and translate it to motion. You should be able to take in the symbol for "apply a function to each item in a vector" at a glance without any clumsy English getting in the way. APL had it right, but coding has been crippled by catering to the lowest common denominator.

Re: Using Voice to Code Faster than Keyboard

#65

Post by rossjudson »

While I've never been able to adapt to using voice to code, what I have done successfully is use Dragon to document my code. I set up some macros that could move forwards and backwards between methods in Eclipse, added a "start doc" macro...Eclipse does a lot of very smart completion so basic features in Dragon handled it without difficulty.

Dictating your javadoc is pretty damn convenient.

Re: Using Voice to Code Faster than Keyboard

#66

Post by delluminatus »

mechanical_fish wrote: post #59
dctoedt wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> try substituting your morning coffee for tea or water. Syntax [edit:] tip: "try substituting tea or water for your morning coffee" or "try replacing your morning coffee with tea or water" EDIT: For the downvoters: Fairly or unfairly, in the non-tech world people judge you by your choice and arrangement of words. (Compilers do much the same thing, of course.)

Nice people also judge those who try to shame people (not all of whom are native speakers of English) into silence on health-related forum threads by picking on irrelevancies.

Yes, let's ignore non-native English speakers' mistakes. That way, they will never learn, and we can continue to subjugate them, along with those for whom English is a first language, but cannot speak it correctly, probably because they were never taught that "should have" is not spelt "should of" and that their "they're"s aren't quite there.

Re: Using Voice to Code Faster than Keyboard

#67

Post by reirob »

daGrevis wrote: post #39

Reminds me of VimSpeak. https://github.com/AshleyF/VimSpeak http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TEBMlXRjhZY

Thanks for sharing!

Just watched it and I find it awesome, not just for the voice recognition but as well as a nice spoken out video of VIM usage. I learned some of nice things that I will use now more regularly in VIM.

Re: Using Voice to Code Faster than Keyboard

#68

Post by dctoedt »

mechanical_fish wrote: post #59
dctoedt wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> try substituting your morning coffee for tea or water. Syntax [edit:] tip: "try substituting tea or water for your morning coffee" or "try replacing your morning coffee with tea or water" EDIT: For the downvoters: Fairly or unfairly, in the non-tech world people judge you by your choice and arrangement of words. (Compilers do much the same thing, of course.)

Nice people also judge those who try to shame people (not all of whom are native speakers of English) into silence on health-related forum threads by picking on irrelevancies.

> those who try to shame people ... into silence on health-related forum threads

That's a bit overstated. But mechanical_fish is right that that my own choice of words could have been more tactful. That's why I changed "Syntax correction" to "Syntax tip" in the GP.

Re: Using Voice to Code Faster than Keyboard

#69

Post by sp332 »

gd1 wrote: post #64
ohwp wrote: post #61

What I think is interesting is that a lot can be done to make typing easier and more human when you can type like you speak (and think). For example: we say/think for each item in list but in a lot of languages you need to type something like foreach(item in list) { A step further: we say/think let a be the substring of b from 1 to the end we need to type a = b.substring(1) Ofcourse the last example is much shorter a…

I disagree. You could argue that a musician probably thinks "I have to play a D# for one and a half beats" as well. Or they can draw a dotted quarter on the sheet. We have symbolic languages for a reason - they are, once learnt, superior. If anything code needs to move further away from spoken language, more in the direction of APL and its descendants. A skilled musician likely doesn't engage the speech centres of th…

It isn't about English, but getting closer to the way programmers think. Most people don't think b.substring(1) natively any more than a musician would think "Da Capo al Coda". There are good parts of course; b[1:] is about as natural as ♩. for notation.

Re: Using Voice to Code Faster than Keyboard

#70

Post by milos_cohagen »

mechanical_fish wrote: post #57

A few months ago I had an RSI problem so bad - able to type only a minute at a time, even sitting with hands on keyboard hurt - that I started down this route. This video was, literally, a life-altering motivator for me, and I was quite obsessed with it. Ironically, after seeing a physical therapist - which, let me tell you , you should do at the first sign of pain, because while they can't help some people I persona…

As someone with a disability (quadriplegic), who types/codes with one finger, I find it appalling that Nuance, Apple and Google haven't opened up their speech recognition systems through a rudimentary API that would allow innovation that would _directly_ help the lives of me and many other disabled people whether it's RSI or worse.
Post reply on HN